A Group of 270 Scientists, Doctors, etc. Submit Open Letter to Spotify Regarding Joe Rogan (JRE)

[Phoenixmgs]

If you compare the life lost to Covid in a year to Flu, Covid usually beats it by about 4 to 5 times. This is just one of those tiresome old soundbites that gets thrown out time and again, and disproved time and again.

We already know you don't give a shit. You've made that abundantly clear over the last few months. Others, with elderly or vulnerable friends & relatives, probably feel differently.

Covid is a new virus that's been around for 2 years basically. It will kill more than the flu if it has the same IFR (or even lower IFR) because there is no built-in population immunity to it. How many immune (natural or vaccine) people did covid kill in 2021? I'm willing to bet it's probably around flu numbers. Why should I care about something that is less risk than me driving to work every day? There's no such thing as anything being zero risk. I will care about something as much of a risk it is and not any more or less.

Obviously it is possible to put successful containment measures in place before a vaccine is developed. We locked down a lot of countries in ~March 2020 precisely for the purpose of buying time for a vaccine to be developed. And transmission plummeted. So we obviously can, and did, prevent spread before a vaccine.

...And then we went and removed those restrictions early, and lo-and-behold, transmission spiked again and got out of hand.

Your argument was that covid could have been contained locally and "burned out" and not caused a pandemic. That is not true unless we got super fucking lucky. Yes, staying away from people slows the spread of any disease, but you're not going to get rid of it by doing that (hence why no one got to zero covid except China...). There's a reason like every country opened up at some point before everyone got vaccinated because it ain't possible to stay closed down for that long. There's costs to staying locked down and do those costs outweigh the benefits? Show me a paper that says the benefits outweigh the costs and I'll be for lockdowns. Do we lock down every year for the flu? If we did, that would save lives from the flu. But we don't do that because the costs outweigh the benefits.

"How many" isn't a good metric; we should be looking at death rates to accommodate for group sizes. And this depends hugely on circumstances country-to-country. In some, the unvaccinated are less than 1/10 as likely to die from it; in others, it's closer to 1/3.

Either way, plenty of people with some level of immunity (either from prior infection or from vaccination) are still dying. Many hundreds a day; thousands a week.

Yes, you should protect those vulnerable and we know who's vulnerable but we keep applying one-size-fits-all policies. In the US, those at least risk from covid have the most restrictions, it's beyond fucking ridiculous.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You forgot that you're talking to wannabe medical armchairs "expert". Nothing but shit comes out of his mouth. I don't even know why anyone bothers with him on the thread at this point.

Sorry if I agree with one of the most cited scientists ever, John Ioannidis.

I think it's blatantly obvious to anyone who reads back more than half a page that all of his arguments come from a core belief that we are all evil for not being willing to die for his convenience. I have him on ignore because it only makes me angry to experience his arrogance.

You haven't understood a word I've said then.

 

[Trunkage]

Youtube removed a video of top doctors saying kids maybe shouldn't wear face masks...

You don't have to convince me against Malone. I didn't say anything he said was right just that he should be able to say it. I just posted a video above this about how he isn't right.

I see it as something similar to journalism. If you are a doctor giving bad medical advice, the same thing should happen to you as what happens to journalist who lie or manipulate stories.

Now, to be fair, in our world those that lie or manipulate get praised for 'speaking the truth' and being 'anti-establishment'. Like truth care about being established or not. We don't live in a world were truth is something people want. And if you go against what's truthful, you can play the victim, scoring extra points with the masses

As to Malone being able to say whatever he wants. Sure. Doesn't mean anyone has to give him a platform. Free Speech is not about giving people microphones. Otherwise, people like Rogan have interfered with MY free speech by not lettting me go on his podcast

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I see it as something similar to journalism. If you are a doctor giving bad medical advice, the same thing should happen to you as what happens to journalist who lie or manipulate stories.

Now, to be fair, in our world those that lie or manipulate get praised for 'speaking the truth' and being 'anti-establishment'. Like truth care about being established or not. We don't live in a world were truth is something people want. And if you go against what's truthful, you can play the victim, scoring extra points with the masses

As to Malone being able to say whatever he wants. Sure. Doesn't mean anyone has to give him a platform. Free Speech is not about giving people microphones. Otherwise, people like Rogan have interfered with MY free speech by not lettting me go on his podcast

I'd be fine with being charged criminally if you A) give factually wrong advice and B) your intent is to deceive people (which is basically what slander is). If you just wrote the law to be only for A, then like every doctor would get charged and there'd be no one doctoring anymore. It's impossible to be right all the time regardless of profession.

Yes, that's basically what my signature is. It's from a great movie but it's so very relevant.

I didn't say Joe Rogan or a news channel like CNN or FOX have to give Malone or anyone a platform. But if they do, it's their prerogative. Taking someone's stuff down is not how you discredit them or get them to shut up either. Just banning someone is going to make a conspiracy stronger (romanticize it) whereas pointing out how flawed the logic is will basically relegate it to the actual kooks like say microchips / tracking device in the vaccines (you got one in your pocket dumbass) or something like flat earthers. Any layman can easily discredit Malone on the spike protein toxicity claim by merely asking "so where's all this proof of toxicity when there's been over 4 billion people in the world vaccinated?"

 

[Kwak]

The CDC finally admits natural immunity is better.

Did they? Where exactly?

 

[Agema]

The fact that you think masks work as some proven fact shows your extreme bias.

"Proven fact" is your straw man. I would say we have a wealth of evidence all the way from physics to trials that makes the issue virtually beyond useful dispute at this time.

You want them to work so you believe the data says they work.

Projection.

I knew the virus was here in February...

Why would I care about what Fauci says when he's always late to the party about everything? Why would I care about what the CDC director says when she spouts blatant lies (masks are 80% effective LMAO)?

The CDC and Fauci are required to act on a reasonable scientific basis. Unlike you, they can't just skim over someone's guesswork and declare it to be the final word. Your over-reliance on guesswork is why you've trumpeted numerous treatments that turn out to be failures (hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D, ivermectin). You simply tune out your failures and carry on deluding yourself you know better.

 

[Agema]

Yet you have literally no evidence to prove your point whatsoever. SHOW ME DATA that I'm wrong. Who should I believe, someone on the Internet that provides no data and basically no argument or one of the most cited scientists in history?

I don't need data, because the problem is that you don't understand what the cost-benefit analyses are showing so you don't have the data you think you do in the first place.

 

[Thaluikhain]

The fact that you think masks work

There's no evidence that Agema thinks masks work, or at least not more evidence than that masks work and you're pretending that evidence doesn't exist.

 

[bluegate]

Wait, we're now pro-censorship?

Yes, I'm in favor of penalising harmful messaging.

So that you don't get fucktwats like this openly running around;

Or get over 900.000 dead Americans because of a fucking pandemic.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well, about 400,000 US citizens died in WW2 (in total, not just in Europe), so if nobody cares about 900k covid deaths, less than half of nobody should care about Nazis. Or something.

 

[Silvanus]

Covid is a new virus that's been around for 2 years basically. It will kill more than the flu if it has the same IFR (or even lower IFR) because there is no built-in population immunity to it. How many immune (natural or vaccine) people did covid kill in 2021? I'm willing to bet it's probably around flu numbers. Why should I care about something that is less risk than me driving to work every day? There's no such thing as anything being zero risk. I will care about something as much of a risk it is and not any more or less.

Really? According to the ONS, in the UK in 2021, 16,079 people died with influenza as the underlying cause. 66,079 people died with COVID-19 as the underlying cause over the same period. And yes, that specifically excludes those where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate but wasn't identified as the cause of death.

(For comparison with your "driving to work" comparison: <2,000 people died from traffic accidents).

Now, we don't have the full year of 2021's data for COVID deaths by vaccination status. But we do have January to October. Which shows that even excluding the last two months of 2021, and even excluding all those who built immunity from prior infection, the number of vaccinated people who died from COVID 19 still beat the number who died of flu. And that includes people who were both vaccinated and unvaccinated against flu!

Your argument was that covid could have been contained locally and "burned out" and not caused a pandemic. That is not true unless we got super fucking lucky. Yes, staying away from people slows the spread of any disease, but you're not going to get rid of it by doing that (hence why no one got to zero covid except China...). There's a reason like every country opened up at some point before everyone got vaccinated because it ain't possible to stay closed down for that long.

"Super fucking lucky", eh? Why do the vast, vast majority of diseases-- including ones that are more contagious than COVID-- fail to become worldwide pandemics? Are we "super fucking lucky" all the time?

There's costs to staying locked down and do those costs outweigh the benefits? Show me a paper that says the benefits outweigh the costs and I'll be for lockdowns.

As I've said several times before, these analyses have already been given to you over and over and over again, and you've just failed to read them.

 

[Seanchaidh]

There's costs to staying locked down

Oh, for sure.

There's a reason like every country opened up at some point before everyone got vaccinated

Yes, businesses want their profits and work is the source of profits.

 

[Agema]

Really? According to the ONS, in the UK in 2021, 16,079 people died with influenza as the underlying cause.

This is tricky.

That 16,079 represents influenza and pneumonia. If you look at deaths identified as influenza only, it's about an order of magnitude lower.

Pneumonia is generally the means by which influenza kills people, but of course not everyone who dies of pneumonia had it because of influenza. Pneumonia may be caused by a different infection (even a common cold) or be multifactorial - and in practice it will not always be clear what infection(s) will have caused pneumonia. It's extremely hard to separate influenza and some pneumonia cases, and it is commonly and realistically assumed the majority of these pneumonia cases without another idenfiable cause are due to influenza.

Hence that 16,079 is likely to be an overestimate of influenza deaths - although probably not by a huge amount. That said, ~16,000 is itself unusually low, because the covid protection measures also protected a lot of people from 'flu: the usual figure is 20-30,000.

One might note UK covid deaths in 2022 (>70% vaccinated) so far have been around 100 a day until omicron cut loose and they're now approaching 300 a day. Even at the lower figure, we're talking over 30,000 covid deaths a year. We might surmise that with a combination of covid vaccination and infection reaching everyone, that may decrease somewhat. Nevertheless, I think we can expect covid deaths to be roughly equivalent to influenza... every year, probably forever.

 

[Kwak]

Oh, for sure.

Well that's because they provide the rest of the world all its dildos and butt plugs.

 

[CaitSeith]

"so where's all this proof of toxicity?"

Right now? At Ottawa, demanding the dissolution of the Canadian government.

 

[Trunkage]

Well, about 400,000 US citizens died in WW2 (in total, not just in Europe), so if nobody cares about 900k covid deaths, less than half of nobody should care about Nazis. Or something.

More US citizens have die to COVID than to the 'Spanish Flu'. Also more than the Civil War. So clearly, you cant care about those either.

Oh, for sure.

The greatest trick economist pulled was pretending they knew something about the economy

If the last month has taught me anything, lockdowns were less economically devastating than opening up

Yes, businesses want their profits and work is the source of profits.

I like how some people care about Big Pharma destroying society but then never apply the same problems to other companies. It's like selective hearing.... maybe we call it selective politicking.

Opening up is just like following Big Pharma

 

[Agema]

I like how some people care about Big Pharma destroying society but then never apply the same problems to other companies. It's like selective hearing.... maybe we call it selective politicking.

Big Pharma actually did their job quite well with covid and showed their value. Albeit with a great deal of government support here and there.

 

[Trunkage]

I'd be fine with being charged criminally if you A) give factually wrong advice and B) your intent is to deceive people (which is basically what slander is). If you just wrote the law to be only for A, then like every doctor would get charged and there'd be no one doctoring anymore. It's impossible to be right all the time regardless of profession.

Yes, that's basically what my signature is. It's from a great movie but it's so very relevant.

I didn't say Joe Rogan or a news channel like CNN or FOX have to give Malone or anyone a platform. But if they do, it's their prerogative. Taking someone's stuff down is not how you discredit them or get them to shut up either. Just banning someone is going to make a conspiracy stronger (romanticize it) whereas pointing out how flawed the logic is will basically relegate it to the actual kooks like say microchips / tracking device in the vaccines (you got one in your pocket dumbass) or something like flat earthers. Any layman can easily discredit Malone on the spike protein toxicity claim by merely asking "so where's all this proof of toxicity when there's been over 4 billion people in the world vaccinated?"

The whole point of a conspiracy is to make sure that no matter what anyone does, they win.

If you deplatform them, they're the victim
If you criticise them, they're the victim
If they deplatform you, they're the victim
If they criticise you, they're the victim
if you defend them, you're the angel
If you do nothing, you're against them
They're definition of Free Speech is that they get Free Speech and no one else does
So, if you talk, you need to be cancelled.
Because, if you listened to Malone, Peterson, Shapiro, Rubin and sometimes Rogan, it's all about how one side is evil and they shouldn't get to have their opinions
It's gets really absurdist when they start calling out the exact behaviour they market themselves on

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Pneumonia is generally the means by which influenza kills people, but of course not everyone who dies of pneumonia had it because of influenza. Pneumonia may be caused by a different infection (even a common cold) or be multifactorial - and in practice it will not always be clear what infection(s) will have caused pneumonia. It's extremely hard to separate influenza and some pneumonia cases, and it is commonly and realistically assumed the majority of these pneumonia cases without another idenfiable cause are due to influenza.

As someone who nearly died from it in the mid-2000s, Pneumonia can go and get fucked.

 

[Silvanus]

This is tricky.

That 16,079 represents influenza and pneumonia. If you look at deaths identified as influenza only, it's about an order of magnitude lower.

Pneumonia is generally the means by which influenza kills people, but of course not everyone who dies of pneumonia had it because of influenza. Pneumonia may be caused by a different infection (even a common cold) or be multifactorial - and in practice it will not always be clear what infection(s) will have caused pneumonia. It's extremely hard to separate influenza and some pneumonia cases, and it is commonly and realistically assumed the majority of these pneumonia cases without another idenfiable cause are due to influenza.

Hence that 16,079 is likely to be an overestimate of influenza deaths - although probably not by a huge amount. That said, ~16,000 is itself unusually low, because the covid protection measures also protected a lot of people from 'flu: the usual figure is 20-30,000.

One might note UK covid deaths in 2022 (>70% vaccinated) so far have been around 100 a day until omicron cut loose and they're now approaching 300 a day. Even at the lower figure, we're talking over 30,000 covid deaths a year. We might surmise that with a combination of covid vaccination and infection reaching everyone, that may decrease somewhat. Nevertheless, I think we can expect covid deaths to be roughly equivalent to influenza... every year, probably forever.

Well, such are the difficulties of trying to draw a like-for-like comparison... we don't have reliable long-term data for 2022 (yet), and the 2021 data is further muddied by the vaccines getting introduced halfway through (since they also dramatically affect the rates for the unvaccinated). But Phoenix asked specifically for 2021 numbers, and I felt that proved him wrong as well as anything could.

Big Pharma actually did their job quite well with covid and showed their value. Albeit with a great deal of government support here and there.

Perhaps on the R&D side... less so in terms of jealously guarding their patents.